Abstract
Reviving Priorian tense logic may seem like a project doomed to fail. The evidence against it seems to be overwhelming. However, in this chapter I show that Priorian tense logic can handle some of the most widely cited evidence against it and argue that it provides a better account of Partee sentences and double-access sentences than obvious alternative theories. Priorian tense logic entails that there are intensional operators that operate on temporal content, as required by the fifth condition on propositions. So, if Priorian tense logic offers a good account of the tenses in English, which it seems that it does, then that is further evidence for favoring temporalism over eternalism.